I've written overview article (English version) for current proposal at the biggest portal for Russian-speaking developers yesterday.
Obviously, article is in Russian, so majority of you won't be able to read it, until I make a translation (it's in progress now).
But important thing is that I also organized a poll there, since habr uses invite system such poll is little bit more accurate, because users most likely have proper background to provide valuable feedback. And current result is:
What should be done with class-fields-proposal? |
Total votes |
% |
| Accept as is |
3 |
2.7 |
Accept, but change [[Define]] semantic to [[Set]] |
7 |
6.4 |
Accept, but tunnel private properties through Proxy |
2 |
1.8 |
Accept, but tunnel private properties through Proxy, and change [[Define]] semantic to [[Set]] |
6 |
5.5 |
Move to stage1/stage2 in order to solve existing problems and/or assess alternatives |
32 |
29.3 |
| Reject in favor of one of the alternatives |
6 |
5.5 |
| Reject fully, since we don't need neither public nor private fields |
11 |
10 |
Separate into 2 proposal (public and private), where public part should be accepted and private should be reworked |
42 |
38.5 |
Total views: more than 4700
Total voters: 109
Those who only interested in results: 35
In most cases duration of discussion around articles at this portal is one week, so in 7 days we'll have more accurate result (I expect that it will have at least 10k views, because my previous article was viewed more than 25k times) and I'll update this post.
But it seems that we can already say that community doesn't satisfied with current proposal.
I've written overview article (English version) for current proposal at the biggest portal for Russian-speaking developers yesterday.
Obviously, article is in Russian, so majority of you won't be able to read it, until I make a translation (it's in progress now).
But important thing is that I also organized a poll there, since habr uses invite system such poll is little bit more accurate, because users most likely have proper background to provide valuable feedback. And current result is:
class-fields-proposal?[[Define]]semantic to[[Set]]ProxyProxy, and change[[Define]]semantic to[[Set]]stage1/stage2in order to solve existing problems and/or assess alternativespublicandprivate), wherepublicpart should be accepted andprivateshould be reworkedTotal views: more than 4700
Total voters: 109
Those who only interested in results: 35
In most cases duration of discussion around articles at this portal is one week, so in 7 days we'll have more accurate result (I expect that it will have at least 10k views, because my previous article was viewed more than 25k times) and I'll update this post.
But it seems that we can already say that community doesn't satisfied with current proposal.